The importance of proving possession of the offending meat and the caution needed in basing a conviction on statements made to persons exercising authority over the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Jay Sengupta, J.

1. This is a revisional application challenging an appellate order of conviction and sentence dated 29.12.2023 passed in an appeal preferred by the petitioner being Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2023 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Mayabunder thereby affirming the Trial Court’s Judgment dated 23.03.2022 passed in CR Case No.15 of 2014 convicting the petitioner-accused and another to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of 3 years for each of the offences along with the fine of Rs.30,000/-to be paid by each of the convicts punishable under Sections 9, 39(3) and 40 (2) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, the sentences having to run simultaneously.

2. A complaint case was filed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Mayabunder under Sections 2, 9, 39(3), 50, 51 and 40 (2) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 with the allegations that on 01.12.2013 at about 3.20 hours the Range Officer, Bakultala received a secret information about illegal hunting, possession and illegal trading of Wildlife Scheduled Species at Tikka Dera. The Range Officer along with team rushed to the house of the petitioner with search warrant and made search in presence of the independent witnesses. The team found Andaman Wild Pig Meat (2 kgs approximately) in stainless steel basin, plastic hunting traps, remaining ropes for making traps, a wooden piece for meat chopping and a ballam. Seizure was made and the accused was arrested. After a purported investigation, the complaint was filed.

3. In the course of trial, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses. PW-1 was the Ranger Officer who conducted the raid. PW-2 was the Forest Guard and was a raiding party member. PW-3 was the another raiding party member who was also a Mazdoor under the Forest Department. PW-4 was only the real independent witness, being the Panchayat Ward Member. PW-5 was the Investigating Officer of the case. PW-6 was the Veterinary Doctor, who examined the meat. PW-7 was the Ranger who made the complaint. PW-8 was the Scientist, who made the report regarding the meat in question.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted as follows. First, the most important document being seizure memo (Exhibit-1) suffers from several defects. The format was of the seizure of forest produce and was not meant for seizure of Wildlife. More importantly, no place of seizure was indicated in the said seizure list. Only alleged independent witness PW-4 was actually an interested one as he had admitted in his cross examination and he had good relation with the forest officials. The evidence of the raiding party members suffers from severe contradictions. In the cross-examination, PW-3 stated that an old lady probably the mother of the accused was present in the house. The seizure of meat was made from the said mother of the accused. This clearly contradicted the prosecution case about seizure of the offending meat from the accused himself. PW-1 and PW-5 both stated in evidence that they had recorded separate statements of the accused. But PW-5 did not know Bengali. The two statements were exhibited and both were in Bengali. In recall, PW-1 was cross-examined and he stated that the statement of the accused was also recorded in presence of the others. Yet, no other independent witness was examined. The presumption under section 57 of the Wildlife Protection Act will come in only once the possession is proved. Here, possession of the offending meat could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Reliance was also placed on Section 50 sub-sections (8) & (9) of the said Act. The appeal preferred by the other appellant is still pending.

5. Learned counsel representing the State submitted as follows. The evidence of PW-1 is clear that the accused was found at the place and was interrogated. Moreover, there was no cross-examination of PW-1 on the question of presence of the accused. PW-1 even went to the house of other suspect Pobitro Biswas along with the acc